The purpose of xcopy32 was to handle the long file names
which xcopy couldn't handle properly. You had to run xcopy32
inside a command-line box inside the Win9x GUI, not at
a normal text-based DOS prompt, which is why some people
may have experienced errors in that regard.

Turns out that a freeware package XXCOPY

http://www.xxcopy.com/index.html

does the job well into Win2000/XP era, so fretting about
what you could do in Win95 and couldn't do in Win98
is simply uninformed, unless you're specifically wanting
to claim that Microsoft sucks, which is largely redundant,
imho.

Imagine if you're selling an OS. Not giving it away,
selling it. Now imagine you realize that one of the tiny
parts of the OS you're selling is allowing people to
easily replicate your OS anywhere for free.

Would you keep that part in your OS? Why, if so?

My point is, that rather than claiming any specific
_thing_ Microsoft does is stupid, trace back to the
reason why they do what they do, and expose it there;
you'll find it more difficult, but weightier in effect.

It's easier to stay on the principles if you do that,
which means you can handle more information on the
topic at one time.

That does require some integrity, though, because
principles formed from weak facts are impotent, but
I do feel I'm digressing from the point that XXCOPY
is a decent Win32-based solution to the question.

-Jared